Editorial
In: Action research, Band 2, Heft 4, S. 347-348
ISSN: 1741-2617
53 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Action research, Band 2, Heft 4, S. 347-348
ISSN: 1741-2617
In: Action research, Band 1, Heft 2, S. 131-132
ISSN: 1741-2617
In: Action research, Band 1, Heft 1, S. 5-8
ISSN: 1741-2617
In: Qualitative social work: research and practice, Band 2, Heft 2, S. 155-175
ISSN: 1741-3117
In this overview the authors describe the underlying principles of action research as: (1) grounded in lived experience, (2) developed in partnership, (3) addressing significant problems, (4) working with, rather than simply studying, people, (5) developing new ways of seeing/theorizing the world, and (6) leaving infrastructure in its wake. We refer to the role of social workers as frontline implementers of important social policies and suggest how action research can be used to both implement and also influence the creation of such policies. We offer examples of action research efforts that can be applied to the social worker's practice-scholarship repertoire.
In: Organization science, Band 11, Heft 5, S. 551-564
ISSN: 1526-5455
Relationships and interactions should be an important focus of attention in organizational scholarship. In contrast to traditional research approaches that focus on independent, discrete entities, methodologies oriented to relational concerns in organizations allow researchers to study the intersubjective and interdependent nature of organizational life. In addition to providing historical and philosophical bases for a perspective which emphasizes relationality, we review the growing number of methods that capture relational aspects of organizational life. Examples include network analysis, and "complexity" modeling, correspondence analysis and participatory research, case study methods, the learning history approach, psychometrics, and action inquiry. Our goal is to establish a "palette" of methodological choices for the researcher interested in operationalizing a relational perspective within organizational research/practice.
In: Action research, Band 17, Heft 1, S. 3-10
ISSN: 1741-2617
In: Action research, Band 17, Heft 1, S. 14-18
ISSN: 1741-2617
In: Action research, Band 18, Heft 1, S. 3-6
ISSN: 1741-2617
© 2020, The Author(s). Expertise in research integration and implementation is an essential but often overlooked component of tackling complex societal and environmental problems. We focus on expertise relevant to any complex problem, especially contributory expertise, divided into 'knowing-that' and 'knowing-how.' We also deal with interactional expertise and the fact that much expertise is tacit. We explore three questions. First, in examining 'when is expertise in research integration and implementation required?,' we review tasks essential (a) to developing more comprehensive understandings of complex problems, plus possible ways to address them, and (b) for supporting implementation of those understandings into government policy, community practice, business and social innovation, or other initiatives. Second, in considering 'where can expertise in research integration and implementation currently be found?,' we describe three realms: (a) specific approaches, including interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, systems thinking and sustainability science; (b) case-based experience that is independent of these specific approaches; and (c) research examining elements of integration and implementation, specifically considering unknowns and fostering innovation. We highlight examples of expertise in each realm and demonstrate how fragmentation currently precludes clear identification of research integration and implementation expertise. Third, in exploring 'what is required to strengthen expertise in research integration and implementation?,' we propose building a knowledge bank. We delve into three key challenges: compiling existing expertise, indexing and organising the expertise to make it widely accessible, and understanding and overcoming the core reasons for the existing fragmentation. A growing knowledge bank of expertise in research integration and implementation on the one hand, and accumulating success in addressing complex societal and environmental problems on the other, will form a virtuous cycle so ...
BASE
Expertise in research integration and implementation is an essential but often overlooked component of tackling complex societal and environmental problems. We focus on expertise relevant to any complex problem, especially contributory expertise, divided into 'knowing-that' and 'knowing-how.' We also deal with interactional expertise and the fact that much expertise is tacit. We explore three questions. First, in examining 'when is expertise in research integration and implementation required?,' we review tasks essential (a) to developing more comprehensive understandings of complex problems, plus possible ways to address them, and (b) for supporting implementation of those understandings into government policy, community practice, business and social innovation, or other initiatives. Second, in considering 'where can expertise in research integration and implementation currently be found?,' we describe three realms: (a) specific approaches, including interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, systems thinking and sustainability science; (b) case-based experience that is independent of these specific approaches; and (c) research examining elements of integration and implementation, specifically considering unknowns and fostering innovation. We highlight examples of expertise in each realm and demonstrate how fragmentation currently precludes clear identification of research integration and implementation expertise. Third, in exploring 'what is required to strengthen expertise in research integration and implementation?,' we propose building a knowledge bank. We delve into three key challenges: compiling existing expertise, indexing and organising the expertise to make it widely accessible, and understanding and overcoming the core reasons for the existing fragmentation. A growing knowledge bank of expertise in research integration and implementation on the one hand, and accumulating success in addressing complex societal and environmental problems on the other, will form a virtuous cycle so that each strengthens the other. Building a coalition of researchers and institutions will ensure this expertise and its application are valued and sustained.
BASE
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
BASE
In: Fazey , I , Schäpke , N , Caniglia , G , Hodgson , A , Kendrick , I , Lyon , C , Page , G , Patterson , J , Riedy , C , Strasser , T , Verveen , S , Adams , D , Goldstein , B , Klaes , M , Leicester , G , Linyard , A , McCurdy , A , Ryan , P , Sharpe , B , Silvestri , G , Abdurrahim , A Y , Abson , D , Adetunji , O S , Aldunce , P , Alvarez-Pereira , C , Amparo , J M , Amundsen , H , Anderson , L , Andersson , L , Asquith , M , Augenstein , K , Barrie , J , Bent , D , Bentz , J , Bergsten , A , Berzonsky , C , Bina , O , Blackstock , K , Boehnert , J , Bradbury , H , Brand , C , Böhme (born Sangmeister) , J , Bøjer , M M , Carmen , E , Charli-Joseph , L , Choudhury , S , Chunhachoti-ananta , S , Cockburn , J , Colvin , J , Connon , I L C , Cornforth , R , Cox , R S , Cradock-Henry , N , Cramer , L , Cremaschi , A , Dannevig , H , Day , C T , de Lima Hutchison , C , de Vrieze , A , Desai , V , Dolley , J , Duckett , D , Durrant , R A , Egermann , M , Elsner (Adams) , E , Fremantle , C , Fullwood-Thomas , J , Galafassi , D , Gobby , J , Golland , A , González-Padrón , S K , Gram-Hanssen , I , Grandin , J , Grenni , S , Lauren Gunnell , J , Gusmao , F , Hamann , M , Harding , B , Harper , G , Hesselgren , M , Hestad , D , Heykoop , C A , Holmén , J , Holstead , K , Hoolohan , C , Horcea-Milcu , A I , Horlings , L G , Howden , S M , Howell , R A , Huque , S I , Inturias Canedo , M L , Iro , C Y , Ives , C D , John , B , Joshi , R , Juarez-Bourke , S , Juma , D W , Karlsen , B C , Kliem , L , Kläy , A , Kuenkel , P , Kunze , I , Lam , D P M , Lang , D J , Larkin , A , Light , A , Luederitz , C , Luthe , T , Maguire , C , Mahecha-Groot , A M , Malcolm , J , Marshall , F , Maru , Y , McLachlan , C , Mmbando , P , Mohapatra , S , Moore , M L , Moriggi , A , Morley-Fletcher , M , Moser , S , Mueller , K M , Mukute , M , Mühlemeier , S , Naess , L O , Nieto-Romero , M , Novo , P , ÓBrien , K , O'Connell , D A , O'Donnell , K , Olsson , P , Pearson , K R , Pereira , L , Petridis , P , Peukert , D , Phear , N , Pisters , S R , Polsky , M , Pound , D , Preiser , R , Rahman , M S , Reed , M S , Revell , P , Rodriguez , I , Rogers , B C , Rohr , J , Nordbø Rosenberg , M , Ross , H , Russell , S , Ryan , M , Saha , P , Schleicher , K , Schneider , F , Scoville-Simonds , M , Searle , B , Sebhatu , S P , Sesana , E , Silverman , H , Singh , C , Sterling , E , Stewart , S J , Tàbara , J D , Taylor , D , Thornton , P , Tribaldos , T M , Tschakert , P , Uribe-Calvo , N , Waddell , S , Waddock , S , van der Merwe , L , van Mierlo , B , van Zwanenberg , P , Velarde , S J , Washbourne , C L , Waylen , K , Weiser , A , Wight , I , Williams , S , Woods , M , Wolstenholme , R , Wright , N , Wunder , S , Wyllie , A & Young , H R 2020 , ' Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth : Visions of future systems and how to get there ' , Energy Research and Social Science , vol. 70 , 101724 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101724
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
BASE
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
BASE
In: Fazey , I , Schapke , N , Caniglia , G , Hodgson , A , Kendrick , I , Lyon , C , Page , G , Patterson , J , Riedy , C , Strasser , T , Verveen , S , Adams , D , Goldstein , B , Klaes , M , Leicester , G , Linyard , A , McCurdy , A , Ryan , P , Sharpe , B , Silvestri , G , Abdurrahim , A Y , Abson , D , Adetunji , O S , Aldunce , P , Alvarez-Pereira , C , Amparo , J M , Amundsen , H , Anderson , L , Andersson , L , Asquith , M , Augenstein , K , Barrie , J , Bent , D , Bentz , J , Bergsten , A , Berzonsky , C , Bina , O , Blackstock , K , Boehnert , J , Bradbury , H , Brand , C , Bohme , J , Bojer , M M , Carmen , E , Charli-Joseph , L , Choudhury , S , Chunhachoti-ananta , S , Cockburn , J , Colvin , J , Connon , I L C , Cornforth , R , Cox , R S , Cradock-Henry , N , Cramer , L , Cremaschi , A , Dannevig , H , Day , C T , Hutchison , C D L , de Vrieze , A , Desai , V , Dolley , J , Duckett , D , Durrant , R A , Egermann , M , Elsner (Adams) , E , Fremantle , C , Fullwood-Thomas , J , Galafassi , D , Gobby , J , Golland , A , Gonzalez-Padron , S K , Gram-Hanssen , I , Grandin , J , Grenni , S , Gunnell , J L , Gusmao , F , Hamann , M , Harding , B , Harper , G , Hesselgren , M , Hestad , D , Heykoop , C A , Holmen , J , Holstead , K , Hoolohan , C , Horcea-Milcu , A-I , Horlings , L G , Howden , S M , Howell , R A , Huque , S I , Canedo , M L I , Iro , C Y , Ives , C D , John , B , Joshi , R , Juarez-Bourke , S , Juma , D W , Karlsen , B C , Kliem , L , Klaey , A , Kuenkel , P , Kunze , I , Lam , D P M , Lang , D J , Larkin , A , Light , A , Luederitz , C , Luthe , T , Maguire , C , Mahecha-Groot , A-M , Malcolm , J , Marshall , F , Maru , Y , McLachlan , C , Mmbando , P , Mohapatra , S , Moore , M-L , Moriggi , A , Morley-Fletcher , M , Moser , S , Mueller , K M , Mukute , M , Muhlemeier , S , Naess , L O , Nieto-Romero , M , Novo , P , O'Brien , K , O'Connell , D A , O'Donnell , K , Olsson , P , Pearson , K R , Pereira , L , Petridis , P , Peukert , D , Phear , N , Pisters , S R , Polsky , M , Pound , D , Preiser , R , Rahman , M S , Reed , M S , Revell , P , Rodriguez , I , Rogers , B C , Rohr , J , Rosenberg , M N , Ross , H , Russell , S , Ryan , M , Saha , P , Schleicher , K , Schneider , F , Scoville-Simonds , M , Searle , B , Sebhatu , S P , Sesana , E , Silverman , H , Singh , C , Sterling , E , Stewart , S-J , Tabara , J D , Taylor , D , Thornton , P , Tribaldos , T M , Tschakert , P , Uribe-Calvo , N , Waddell , S , Waddock , S , van der Merwe , L , van Mierlo , B , van Zwanenberg , P , Velarde , S J , Washbourne , C-L , Waylen , K , Weiser , A , Wight , I , Williams , S , Woods , M , Wolstenholme , R , Wright , N , Wunder , S , Wyllie , A & Young , H R 2020 , ' Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth : Visions of future systems and how to get there ' , Energy Research & Social Science , vol. 70 , 101724 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101724
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
BASE
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
BASE